(April 30, 2015 at 7:57 pm)snowtracks Wrote: Those article state theories as to why there was evolution to hominids. Two problems: 1) Starts with the 'fact' that primates evolved into hominids. 2) No supporting anatomical evidence.The theories are regarding how they evolved, because the fact that they evolved is established. They are studying the anatomical evidence to determine where the various species fit into the overall scheme and how they might be related (directly, or as separate branches from a common ancestor, etc). See, they're not the ones approaching it from the wrong end; you are. So it's not surprising that it might not make sense to you. But that's your problem, not theirs. Your rejection of things that have already been established long ago makes for some amusing forum posts, but doesn't matter to them --or their work-- one whit.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
-Stephen Jay Gould